Già successo anche su Backgammon
A volte sono inspiegabili i punteggi.
Anche in questa partita ho perso 24 punti ed ero molto vicino all'avversario.

Per recuperarli bisogna spesso poi riuscire a vincere 2 partite.

Bisognerebbe introdurre una penalità anche per chi fa un sacco di partite inizialmente, poi arriva in cima alla classifica e per non scendere non fa più nessuno scontro...

Inserire per esempio minimo 1 match/day oppure si perdono X points

Already happened on Backgammon and many other games.

Sometimes the scores are inexplicable.
Also in this game I lost 24 points and I was very close to the opponent.

To retrieve them, you often need to win 2 games.

>>>> TIP valid for all Arena tables
A penalty should also be introduced for those who make a lot of parties initially, then arrive at the top of the ranking and to avoid going down, they no longer fight.

For example, enter at least 1 game / day or player loses X points

absurd, I was second in Elite, lost with the third and I lost 20 points ... it is unlikely to recover them especially in games where luck has a big weight

In games where luck matters too much, you shouldn't use ELO, EAS or similar!!!

For example in Senet, Can't Stop, Backgammon or other similar games where the skill matter less, the probability of meeting a lower level player is VERY high, as well as the possibility of losing.

It is not true that a stronger one is more likely to win than a less strong one, it matters too much what comes out of the roll of the dice.

I think for these type of games that ELO or EAS scoring system is not fair.

FOR EXAMPLE:
- playing against a lower 7 position player (very close), winning I gained 19 points, losing I lost 24 (that's 20%, too much where luck counts so much).

- playing against a lower position (but in the same League, Elite) also makes you lose 30 points in case of defeat while only 6 points in case of victory.
For the same reason even if you play against with one of the same League (therefore at your level), which however is many positions below, you have a strong probability of losing a lot of points by losing and gaining very few in case of victory.

The probability for both players, however, is the same, because the skills counts too little, the luck with the dices counts more.

Another example #162593153 Can't Stop table
I already wrote in other post, about other game.
In games where luck matters more than player's skill, losing players should not be penalised, especially if they are close at the end of match (right now if not close in ranking, too many points are taken away).
It should have bonuses instead the winnings with greater distance like the table #162593153

I've been complaining about this MANY times. In Elite league there are NO players that are 10x worse or better than others. The players there are FILTERED, so awarding 36 points in such a game is RIDICULOUS and only serves to mess up the top 20 scores. Hence, top players don't play, hence the likelihood of getting a 36:4 game is pretty high.

I totally agree with BarboRosso, the Arena points is designed to penalise players who want to play, which I think goes against the spirit of the games.

Also particularly frustrating (and again, like BarboRosso said) when the games depends on luck (not all games are chess). For instance playing Yahtzee in the elite (around 1580 points) with another player who is in the elite (around 1450 points) penalised me on 28 points. But a victory on the same levels would give me 14. It is a mostly luck game, so there is kind of pointless to play once you get to the top 10/20 because you'll likely loose all your progress.

Maybe the game's luck factor could be included in the count so in a game like chess where luck has zero factor it can be harsh, on dice games where luck plays an important factor it can be less harsh, and games that are completely random (like connect4 where the winner is decided on who starts playing) it can be lesser harsh